Skip to main content

tv   FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace  FOX News  May 13, 2012 3:00pm-4:00pm PDT

3:00 pm
>> i am here for chris wallace. more questions than answers after a terror attack against the united states was foiled. are leaks of the covert operation hurting national security? are airport screeners doing enough to protect passengers? we will ask senator feinstein, chairman of the select committee on intelligence. then, the 2012 campaign is in full swing. well talk milks with republican senator john thune who some believe is a top conned materials in the vice presidential sweepstakes. >> president changes his mind on gay marriage and now it is a campaign issue and we ask the
3:01 pm
panel how it plays out. all right now, on fox news sunday. hello, happy mother's day from fox news in washington. this week the united states did a joint convert operation with saudi saudi arabia and blocked a terrorist attack. and now to discuss a couple of important domestic issues is the chairman of the select committee on intelligence, senator feinstein. senator, welcome behalf to fox news. let's start with the latest information from yemen where al qaeda is basically headquartered. there is word of two drone strikes that took out two. what is your sense over what the situation is with al qaeda in that region? >>guest: the sense, i know the sense is, aqa perform is the number one threat to our country and there are efforts to get at bombmaker of this
3:02 pm
nonmetallic bomb which could be able to go through the airport security. and the fact it was recovered and recovered intact is an impressive win for the c.i.a. but it means that we have to devote all of our resources right now to try to end this because it can become very, very complicated. >> information that leaked out when the story broke on monday, there are concerns in both houses, both sides of the aisle. your counterpart in the house of representatives said he was upset this could disrupt ongoing operations and it could be a cream over the information that leaked out. here is defense secretary. >> you have to protect these people and you have to protect the confidence that, and the classification, and the covert nature of this kind of work. and when the leaks take place i cannot tell you how much they damage our ability to be able to
3:03 pm
pursue our intelligence efforts. >> what kind of investigation do you thing should be launched how this information was released? >>guest: bun. -- a big one. this is a serious leak. the operation was closely held. it was c.i.a., f.b.i., homeland security and t.s.a. so, a limited number of people knew about it, and general procedure would have the chairman and the vice chairman of each of the intelligence committees help were briefed during the attack or prior to the attack. this was not the case. there was to briefing. the leak came to an a.p. rotter, the government called and asked the story be held and it was held until monday and was released and what this does, it jeopardizes the asset. it jeopardizes our ability to
3:04 pm
relate to other countries for other countries to help us. and it gives a tip-off to aqap to be more careful who they use as their couriers, as their bombers. so, the leak, really, did endanger sources and methods and the leak, has to be prosecuted. the investigation is being done, hopefully can be concluded, and criminal charges will go to the department of justice. >> you touched on something whether this bomb would have been detected. you mention at&t was -- t.s.a. was involved. there is debate whether our current screening technology would pick it up. here is homeland security secretary. >> all things considered it would be detected but you said it would be undetectable coming in on an american airliner, so,
3:05 pm
are you confidence in our screening technology? >>guest: for this particular material, candidly, no. and i cannot 10 that i am. i think the patdown probably is better than the machines and americas have to understand that this particular kind of explosive, nonmetallic, is not easy to detect. that is one of the reasons that the suspect wore it in his underwear. so that is a problem. and that is something that t.s.a. has to grapple with. and the american public has not been terribly sympathetic but most people are. most travelers say i will go with the flow, i recognize the need. therefore, i don't mind being patted down. i'm in that category but not everyone is. so, i came from afghanistan last
3:06 pm
week. along with my colleagues on the intelligence committee through dubai and there the screener was very heavy, three machines you passed through, three times, a heavy patdown, they opened hand luggage at the gate, looked for gunpowder and other things on your hands. and there was a big patdown with additional security people present and it was very evident. having said that you cannot maintain that all of the time so i think it is very more than imt that t.s.a. keep up the efforts and american whose travel a lot understand what is at stake. and when you see the numbers people on the large planes you are aware of the fact that this is, really, necessary to do. and particularly right now. i am hopeful we will be abe to
3:07 pm
candidly kill this bombmaker and some of his other associates because there is a very dangerous process in play at resident time. >> you just returned from afghanistan and i want to talk about news from there that a key former taliban minister an envoy not peace process in negotiations was gunned down, taliban says it is not responsible. but, having been there you expressed concerns about the status of the taliban there and the fact that we are transitioning. >>guest: militarily, and i think general allen is doing a great job, we spent time with him and militarily, i think the taliban are not going to beat us. but what the taliban has done is insinuating itself in a shadowy presence, with shadow governors, and they control over a third of the land in which people live, and they have expand into the
3:08 pm
north, into the northeast, and while we were there, in one province, they closed 14 schools in 17 districts. and, then, they killed five education officials and wounded others. and, now, there is in latest assassination, of someone who has been a leader in the peace council. what this does is demonstrate to many of us that the toll -- taliban are waiting to come back and i don't think that can be dispensed with. we spent time with president karzai and he said afghanis will not let the taliban come back. i met for two hours with women parliamentarians of whom i'm really extraordinarily proud and they were very strong against it. but, the question comes: can they come back? they are taxing the poppies to the tune of $125 million. that in 2011, the united states
3:09 pm
figure, went to support their operations. they have a safe harbor in pakistan. and the pakistanis are doing nothing to abate that safe harbor. it is a big problem. the key to afghanistan is, really, action by pakistan. with respect to the haqqani and the taliban and the new solidarity between our two countries to eliminate safe haven for terrorists. >> the general allen talked the focus for the forces is on preparing the afghan forces to make sure they are ready. knowing we are leaving with everything you laid out are you concerned about our timeline? >>guest: there were two things that came through to me as positive. the first was according to general allen the 362,000 mark of trained afghan military will
3:10 pm
be met. he said they are doing very well, they are in the lead in many missions, and they are carrying it out with talent and swiftness. the second thing that i saw were schoolgirls in the white scarves coming out of school even one holding a small sister by the hand, laughing and holding hands and walking down the street. i remember the days when acid was thrown in the face of young girls going to school and to see that change is really quite wonderful. 40 percent of the students in schools in afghanistan today, are girls. and i think that is just great. >> let's turn to domestic issues. i want to read a quote from 2008 : i believe marriage is between a man and a woman, i'm not in favor of gay marriage. that was then senator president obama and now he is the president. and he is what he said with
3:11 pm
robin roberts. >> i have concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm same-sex couples should be able to get married. >> some say it is a significant change. has he flip-flopped on the issue under pressure during a tough re-election campaign? >>guest: i don't think it is a flip-flop. there is no political calculus in this because it is not smart if he is going to do frist a political point of view it doesn't make any sense. from a personal point of view i can tell you what happens because it is also we happened to me. you get to know more and more gay couples. you see the happiness. you see the economic security that marriage brings. and even more fundamentally, you see children who otherwise would not have an adopted home being able to have that home and, so,
3:12 pm
same-sex couples raise children, they do a fine job. i think when you see this and it has happened in california more and more people say, what's wrong with people being happy? >> and now to j.p. morgan chase, a loss of $2 billion this week describes by some as a hedge that went wrong. there has been swift reaction from both sides of the aisle and talk of more hearings, and this was not government money or customer money. should washington, dc, or should it not get involved? >>guest: this is a big surprise. because this particular bank is well respected. and so to have this kind of a loss from hedging activists is a big surprise. what it points out is that there are no rules of the road for hedging and for derivatives. and this needs to happen. the bill provides for it but it
3:13 pm
hasn't taken place, and, so, now you have had what i would consider an enormous loss in a very high profile, very good investment bank. so, it is a danger signal that the rules need to get set by the respective bodies, the s.e.c. and the consumer finance commission. >> it has been 1,130 days since a budget has passed the senate. where does the blame lie? >> in essence we have a budget but the numbers are solid. i'm an appropriator and my appropriation subcommittee which is energy and water, gets an allocation based on that law that we passed. the budget law. so it is passed. and it is functioning. so, there is no annual budget. that is true. but the allocations have gone out. and my bill has just passed out of committee.ó÷5
3:14 pm
my bill has just passed out of committee. i think there are four senate appropriation bills now, out of the committee awaiting floor action. nothing has stopped. the government is moving. >> shannon: great to see you again here on "fox news sunday." thanks for sharing part of your mother's day. happy mother's day. >> thank you, shannon. much of the best. >> shannon: up next, policy and politics with senator john thune. ♪
3:15 pm
♪ ♪ ♪ that should do it. enjoy your new shower. [ door opens, closes ] ♪ i can do anything ♪ i can do anything today ♪ i cano anywhere ♪ i can go anywhere today ♪ la la lla la la la [ male announcer ] dow solutions
3:16 pm
help millions of people by helping to make gluten free bread that doesn't taste gluten free. together, the elements of science and the human element can solve anything solutionism. the new optimis
3:17 pm
>> shannon: one of the mitt romney's earliest supporters, senator john thune. welcome back to "fox news sunday." >> good morning, shannon. >> shannon: we'll get back to the ticket in a minute but
3:18 pm
before the break you may have heard us talking with senator feinstein about the situation, jp morgan losing $2 billion this week on credit derivatives. senator feinstein is among those who think if the regulations were fully enacted it would have prevented a situation like this. why shouldn't washington empower regulators to get involved? >> first off, i don't think we know all of the facts about this. this was detected by the company by jp morgan chase is a cop that has been well respected in industry. the whole issue of dodd frank impacts not justice temperaturically risky institutions but a lot of community banks' cross, south dakota, which is why i voted against it it. it piles lots of compliance burdens on smaller bank across the country. with respect to federally insured systemically risky institutions like the big banks it is important that we make sure that we have some good
3:19 pm
safeguards in place but do it in a way that doesn't impair their abit to mitigate risk and protect themselves in their balance sheets as well. this issue is something that will be talked about probably for are some days ahead here but at least for right now i think we need to make sure we have all of the facts in before we jump top conclusions about the need for greater and further regulation. dodd frank was a sweeping far reaching regulation much of which is still trying to be interpreted by the regulators and i think we need to give them an opportunity to do that job before we reach it any conclusions about moving forward with additional regulations which could make it more difficult for financial institutions to do their jobs. >> shannon: let's turn to another big headline this week, gay marriage. the president now saying he does support the right of gay couples to get married. i want to give you a look at a poll from many sa today gallup. it shows 51% of americans approve of his position compared to 45 russian russian russian russian
3:20 pm
mitt romney is clearly in favor of marriage between one woman and one man, how does he address the concerns so she not bore trade as unwelcoming to fellow americans? >>guest: for, this is an issue, shannon, which there is great difference, in definition, like so many other issues on this campaign. i think that governor romney's position has been very clear from the time he was governor of massachusetts. it is not something that hasn't changed and the president obviously has changed his position, more from the time he was the state senator and to what we heard this last week. and, the view that governor romney holds on traditional marriage is held by a lot of
3:21 pm
people across this country. there are more than 30 states who by statute or constitutional amendment have defined marriage as being between a man and a woman. but that is one of many issues that will be discussed during the course of this campaign, and one of many differences but the biggest difference is the view that the president has, and governor romney has on how to fix the economy and how do we get the economy going and get people back to work, and to me that is the issue that is on the mines of most americans, and if you look at the economy, the economic record this president has, you have 39 straight months, now, of more than 8 percent unemployment, you have massive amounts of debt, and you have fuel prices that have doubled, and health insurance costs have gone up 25 percent, and college tuition is up 25 percent, and that is the economic record that i think most people are going to judge the president by after 3 1/2 years. governor romney has a different view of how to lead the country that is based on the power of freedom opposed to the power of government and that will be the
3:22 pm
bright line that delend eights and defines the two candidacies headed into the november election and the issue that will compel most americans to come out and support governor romney. >> the president is pointing a finger at congress saying you guys are not getting anything done, particularly republican policies are behind the sputtering economy and giving you a "to-do list." here is part of the weekly address. >> we tried their ideas for a decade. and it didn't work out so well. we can not go back to the same policies that got us in this mess. we have to move forward. russian russian -- russian -- he is offsetting the tax breaks and incentives that contains get to cover costs of mooring -- moving overseas, and were senator grassley said republican would not go along with the second part of that of cutting the tax breaks that help those moving businesses out of the united states. why not? >>guest: well, look, the
3:23 pm
question you have to ask, shannon in response to the president's speech where this was 3 1/2 years ago? he had 3 1/2 years to put prescriptions in place to get the economy back on track. all of a sudden at the 11th hour he has a list for congress. we frankly, it is many of the policies that have gotten us in this ditch, and, we need to get out of the ditch and the way to get out of the ditch isn't to double down on the things that he has done. this has been the most massive expanse of government that we have seen, literally, in the last half century, and we need a very different vision for the future of this country, and it starts with ending some of the policies this president has put in place which is why we came out with a "to stop," list, we said you need stop the job-killing regulations that are strangling small businesses, and you need quit proposing tax increases that make it more difficult and more expensive for small businesses to create jobs, and stock market blocking the keystone xl pipeline which would help end our dependence on the foreign sources of energy and
3:24 pm
put people to work in this country. and, stop this divisive class warfare rhetoric which is so counterproductive when we are talking about trying to grow the economy and create jobs. the president's ideas, they are all fine and good, but most of them are a rehash of what we have heard before but more importantly where he has been for 3 1/2 years and we still have, 39 months, consecutive months of unemployment above 8 percent and record debt, and record amounts of spending and record amounts of expansion of government at a time when we ought to be creating jobs in the private economy. that is the obama economy and the "bomb record -- the obama record and why governor romney can make a different case to the american people about a different direction. >> the president will say that republicans are obstructionist, part of the reason nothing is getting done on capitol hill, so, to that point i talk to you about a primary election this week involving a republican senator luge arrest -- lugar
3:25 pm
defeated bid richard murdouch predict diagnosis he is elected heel not get anything done. having a hard right considered in the november election do you worry about losing that seat? the fall? >>guest: he will win. he has won statewide and we are confident about our prospects in the state of indiana and around the country for the reasons mentioned. people are voting comment and johns -- jobs. what they see is the fact we have not passed a budget in three years. it is very dysfunctional. recently, a place where the presidential campaign is sort of litigated and they moved the presidential campaign to the floor of the united states senate. we have voted that are about nothing but political messages, talking about the buffett tax
3:26 pm
rule the last week, about the interest rate on student loans which we agree needs to be addressed but they want to do it in a way that republicans cannot support. and so the floor of the united states senate, the reason it is not functioning today, is because it has been converted and is about political gimmicks. and the people who are running across the country including. mr. murdoch are talking about debt and jobs and the economy on the hearts and mines -- minds of the american people. we need to address those challenges. many in the united states senate would welcome the opportunity to vote on a budget that does reform and deals with the fundamental challenges but that is not happening today, and i hope we get new people in november who help us retake the majority in the united states senate, help us set an agenda that takes us in a different direction for the future of the country and work with the republican president who is intent on solving and fixing
3:27 pm
problems rather than just running for re-election and using campaign game evenings to distract people from his economic record. >> here is harry reid on the proposition of the new member criticizing the far right family wing of the senate and said that is what we need, more people who are willing to do nothing but fight. is there room for compromise in the united states senate today? >>guest: well, of course there is. and that's what we are going to have to bring the two sides together. but we have to recognize and define what thãproblem is. the democrats in the senate seem to believe the problem is we do not have enough revenue and republicans believe that the problem is we spend too much, and, the way that you get people back to work and grow the economy is to empower the small businesses and the private economic, and make it lens expensive and less difficult to create jobs. what we have seen from the president and his allies in congress, their desire is to continue to grow and expand the size of the government and i
3:28 pm
think that we have to recognize that what we have fundamentally, first, is a spending problem, we are spending more as a percentage of our entire committee today, almost 25 percent, than we spent at any time since the end of world war ii and this is a spending problem, we have to built that, and we have to recognize it was driving spending, medicare, kid, social security, food stamp overstamps and if we are going to save social security and medicare we have to reform them and get them in a direction that puts us on a sustainable fiscal path. that is how we get the economy and the country back on track. and, in our fiscal house in order. and that is what a lot of the candidates across the country are talking abou
3:29 pm
hard to get governor romney elected. >> you endorsed him early in november before a single primary vote was cast. here is what a political expert says, you have solid credentials where romney is perceived as not conservative enough and they balance each other. would they make a good ticket, senator? >>guest: well, look, now that governor romney is the nominee, going to be the nominee of our party, he and his team have put in place the process where they will look at various people. i have high level confidence. i have seen him in the organization. he puts really good people around him, and they will have a number of good people to choose from. i respect that process, but i want to work with the president, shannon, who is serious about solving this country's problems and getting us back on right track. question not stay on the track that we're on right now or we are headed to europe. and, that's why we need a new
3:30 pm
president, and i hope we can get a majority in the senate to work with him to focus in solving the problems. i hope to be a partner with a president romney and his administration in the united states senate to get serious about putting this country back on track, both toward growing the economy and creating jobs and getting spending and debt under control. >> if he called and said you were the one that could make it happen being number two, would you say yes-or-no? >>guest: you never rule out opportunities or options when you involved in public life and you want do make a difference, in my view, i have a job to do in the united states nat. i like what i am doing. i think i can make a difference and working with the republican president we can do some good things for the country so that's my job, the job i have, why aspire to do anything else, and, obviously, the romney team, his campaign team, will carefully vet some folks they are looking at and we have a lot of good options lout and i hope to be
3:31 pm
able to contribute to the success of this ticket, this fall, and not only for the presidency but as i said in the united states senate where i think a lost battles will be fought in the years ahead, if we can get some new leadership in this country that will lead into the problems and not runaway from them and try to distract by talking about all kinds of issue nasa have nothing to do with what is ailing this country and what needs to be fixed if we create a brighter future for our children and grandchild. >> and now another matchup that could put you head to head with president obama: no jet you are quite an athlete and we have some footage of you playing in a tournament, basketball charity tournament at georgetown, and we will watch use drain one. if you and president obama went one-on-one, who would win? >>guest: well, i think the president has a pretty good game, but, frankly, i'm still waiting for my invitation to play with him. i have not received it yet. and i don't think that's coming any time soon, but, would welcome the opportunity, as
3:32 pm
always to place 'em up and obviously be a great privilege to play with the president of the united states. >> keep us posted, senator thune. >> president's position on gay marriage completes the revolution what does it mean for the political prospects in the political prospects in november today, we stand against the tyranny of single mile credirds. battle speech right? may i? [ horse neighs ] or too long, people have settled for single miles. with the capital one venture card, you'll earn doubleiles on every purchase, every day! [ visigoths cheer ] hawaii, here we come. [ alec ] so sign up day for a venture card at and start earning double. [ all ] double miles! [ brays ] what's in your wallet? can you play games on that? not on the runway. no. the calcium they take because they don't take it with food. switch to citracal maximum plus d. it's the only calcium supplement
3:33 pm
that can be taken with or without food. that's why my doctor recommends citracal maximum. it's all about absorption. and i thought "i can't do this, it's just too hard." then there was a moment. when i decided to find a way to keep going. go for olympic gold and go to college too. [ male announcer ] every day we help students earn their bachelor's or master's degree for tomorrow's careers. this is your moment. let nothing stand in your way. devry university, proud to support the education of our u.s. olympic team. here at the hutchison household but one dark stormy evening... there were two things i could tell: she needed a good meal and a good family. so we gave her what our other cats love, rina cat chow complete. it's the best because it has something for all of our cats! and after a couple of weeks she was healthy, happy, and definitely part of the family.
3:34 pm
we're so lucky that lucy picked us. [ female announcer ] purina cat chow complete. always there for you. my new place isn't that far away. it's 15 miles away ! with this droid razr by motorola on verizon 4g lte, we can video chat on skype. you're gonna get lost ! this has gps. well, that makes me feel better. me too. i'll go get two from the back. the droid razr by motorola now only $99.99. hurry in, offer ends may 13th. verizon.
3:35 pm
you will have the chance to make >> you have a chance to make your voice heard on the issue of making sure that everybody, regardless of sexual orientation, is treated fairly. >> marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman. >> you heard remarks about the big political news the commander in chief endorsing gay marriage. and now, brit hume, senior political analyst, and our guest
3:36 pm
from the christian science monitor and paul from the "wall street journal" and hot of the editorial report on fox news, and political analyst, juan williams. welcome, everyone. juan, what do you make of this? plus or minus? >>juan: if you look at poll numbers, sort of a wash. most say it will not impact the way they vote. but if you break it down, suddenly you see there are more are saying they are less likely to vote for the president than more likely. i look add it in terms of democratic base, it excites the young people, who just do not have a problem with gay marriage. where it i don't cause a problem is with a lot of older socially conservative people, republicans who were not going to vote for him nation and you thing of some of the states, socially conservative states like virginia, wisconsin, someplace like michigan, and that could be a problem when you have a large, not large, but a substantial
3:37 pm
number of independent voter who say they have thought about and it with african-american voters, most african-americans do not support gay marriage. are they willing to vote against or not show up at the polls in support of president obama? i don't see that right new. >> will see in the poll that came after the president's announcement 55 percent of african-americans, they say they do still oppose the idea of gay marriage. and now other polling, you mention independents and others could be impacted. this poll is after the president's announcement from gallup, showing 23 percent of independents and 10 percent of democrats say this is going to make them less likely to vote for the president. do you think it will matter? paul: i don't think it will be decisive. i think it could end up mattering in some states, particularly the swing states, the conservative states the president is targeting, like north carolina.
3:38 pm
maybe virginia. i agree with juan, i will break type, the president's base, the question is whether there would happen after the election or before. so i give him credit for doing it before, truth in advertising. >> was it forced by the vice president? >>guest: i think what we have learned since that in the last week they were going to do this they just did it earlier than they planned to do it, a little bit closer to the convention was planned. but it helped governor romney and it helps him because a lost the conservatives, especially culture conservative base are more motivated. he does not have to do much to most same them. this will most likely motivate them. >>shannon: and rick santorum is saying romney should run with there and invest if this social issue. >> i think romney is not going to do that he has not done it so
3:39 pm
far. on friday he was in north carolina, which voted overwhelm to ban gay marriage and he did not mention it so it makes both sides nervous, i think, because it has changed so fast and is, still, in flux, up until 2009, support for gay marriage was increasing at 1 percent a year and since 2010 it has changed by 5 percent a year a huge shift and it makes both sides feel unsure how it will play out. yes, a lot of the swing states that are crucial have passed amendments banning gay marriage, but some of the states did it back in 2004 and it is a completely different landscape now so there is a lot of uncertainty and neither will want to hit this issue too hard because they don't know how it will shake out. >>shannon: and do you think? >> it is a reason to distrust the national polling because it looks like a majority of the public supports gay marriage but
3:40 pm
state by state, you get an entirely different picture and what people say to pollsters could differ. this is an issue that has emerged as a civil rights issue. a country in which you do not want to be seen as standing. to thwart civil rights. you may tell a pollster one thing but that does not mean you will vote that way, and i don't think the apparent supports means that is how people will support. it is a knelt minus -- net minus for the president. and, also, it looks so nakedly political. the president's position has not evolved but resolved. in 1986 he said he was in favor. in 2004 running for office, he said, no, he was again it, and he stayed that way until just now. and we know as paul described they planned to roll this out at a particular time. obviously, for maximum political advantage. so this is position we are now to believe he has held for some time but withheld at the same time, and what did he say, actually? did he say, i'm for this and i
3:41 pm
want to make it possible everywhere? in an effort to advance a constitutional amendment, he says heel live up to the -- says he will leave it up to the states. very obviously political. all of it. and as people look at that, it could further the impression, which i think the president suffers from, that far from being someone who a different kind of post partisan leader he turns out to be just another politician doing what politicians do. that is harmful. >>shannon: folks are more conservative when they go in the we voting booth? >> not on all issues. >> this has been 33 times that the gay marriage has lost. liz is right, five or 10 years ago, things are changing but as recently as last week in north carolina, 61 percent to 39
3:42 pm
percent not just to pass a law but to put it in the constitution that marriage is between a man and a woman so there is something to what brit says but where i disagree now that the president is saying, this is what he really believes, everyone knew this is what he really believed. those people who pay attention to politics. so, there is almost kind of a okay, leave that out there. now you are finally being honest. brit: he took a position that we now know, you would say he did not believe in and held for it that time. >>guest: that is typical of politicians. brit: there you go. >> but he has come around to what he truly thinks and that --. brit: why not want to do something in furtherance of it? >> the reason is he was out, his position, going way back to when he was running in illinois, and filled out a question ear from a gay organization, he said he
3:43 pm
favored gay marriage at that time he changed because he cannot afford to get out in front of the evolving american position. brit: what a profile in courage. >>juan: i think it is, if this was an absolute right issue, why rent you for say this is a right? he didn't say that, he said it is up to the states and that is a key point from mitt romney's position who says she for a federal ban on gay marriage. president obama's justice department does not comport with president obama who ended "don't ask, don't tell" in the military, and president obama is saying, here, i just am leaving it up to the states, if they vote one way or another. that is different in the 50's african-americans and civil rights will be left up to the states. if it was up to the state it would not have passed in most states especially the southern states so the president's position is political but is it the right issue? the right stand?
3:44 pm
i think that given the bigotry, the history of we maltreatment of gay people in our society, lack of employment opportunities, all of us have had to evolve and i think the president is saying he evolved reflects america's shifting position on this very difficult issue. >>shannon: we will leave it for a moment. ion to run a front page investigative piece about mitt romney's high school years.
3:45 pm
3:46 pm
3:47 pm
>> no question but i did some stupid things when i was in high school and obviously if i
3:48 pm
senator anyone by virtue of that i would be very sorry for it and apologize. >>shannon: republican presidential candidate talking about playing pranks in high school, the subject of a long "washington post" article this week, and back to talk about bit our panel. does the campaign bear responsibility talking about what a prankster is? >> we have heard about the pranks and high jinx the romney campaign put out and as a reporter i wondered, what exactly are they talking about? and this "washington post" story comes out, and, look, i don't think wants to hold presidential candidates for what they did in high school. i don't think democrats want to do that but how he responded to the story did matter and he missed an opportunity. because, really, it was a disturbing story to read, there remain four people on the record who said necessity were deeply troubled by this incident and it showed a mean side, and, even if
3:49 pm
no one thinks he has that mean side, there was an opportunity for him to come forward and show some largeness of spirit and character in how he dealt with there and by saying he didn't remember and offeringsp i8 thist of apology anyway for something he says he doesn't remember, romney's biggest problem is not that people think he is mean but people think he is insincere and the handling of this issue only fed that perception. >> did it warrant a front page article in the "washington post"? >> if this was connected, look, this was no a prank. this was hazing. and it was mean. no doubt. and i don't have any real doubt about the bake truth of the story. the problem with the story dating from high school, it was the failure of the "washington post" to connect it else is in romney's life or career. if this were a story that said this is about where you get the first example of the mean
3:50 pm
streak he has shown or the tendency to take advantage of people in a weaker position. there was nothing. this thing almost book length with an enormous flash on the front page almost all about this one incident disconnected from anything else we know about romney. the point is i think it was much adu about not very much and you have to wonder what is an editor at a newspaper thinking. editors who edit newspapers do in a certain way express editorial opinions by the way they play the story where they play it and at what length. this obviously struck the editors at the washington post and the reporters who work on the story as a big deal. you you have to wonder what kind of news judgment these people have if they really think that. liz citeds romney's failure to respond in her view effectively to that as give giving some strength to the story. that couldn't have entered into what the post reported.
3:51 pm
they didn't have that reaction. my view is i think the story was if it were played on an inside page at much less length it might have been appropriate. the way it was handled ridiculous. >> shannon: there has been backlash from the story. there were different versions that ran in the washington post related to one of the individuals quoted in the story. here are two different versions. we want you to take a look. we report, you decide. this is the original online paragraph from the article. said i always enjoyed his franks said a popular friend of romney's who has long been bothered by the labor incident. this is the corrected version. i always enjoyed his prank. >> and from whom did he hear about it? >> the washington post. >> he said from classmates in the updated version. >> shannon: there was never a connection that ran in the washington post. paul, did they have an obligation to explain the difference in the versions? >> i think it would have helped
3:52 pm
them if they could have done that. we all made those mistakes. my newspaper has and i have as an editor and reporter. the reason they went with the anecdote is because the rest of the 5,000 words were so boring. it was 5,000 words about nothing. his high school years. went to an elite prep school. he was a leader of the prankster group. so what. in is the only anecdote that they found that was actually kind of edgy and they put it up front and made a big deal of it and made more of it than it actually is. if this is the worst thing the american people find out about mitt romney in the next five months he is going to be a very happy man. >> it was upsetting to the young man abouts family as well. >> the story was upsetting. >> shannon: the portrayial of john is factuallily incorrect and we are aggrieved that he
3:53 pm
would be used to further a political agenda. there will be no more comments. >> they don't like his being dispar anded or his life cast through this sentencing you larenta prison. apparently he came out to h his family before he died but that is not the entirety of his life and and they don't want his life used for political purposes. what streaks me is people want to know the character of the candidates and brit said this was bullying and hazing. the request he is whether or not the newspaper acted in such a way to advance the democrat's agenda this this. they look advantage of the larger national discussion of gay rights and the president saying he is in favor to come out at this moment. >> shannon: my impression is this story had been in the works. >> i think they expedited the publication to try to take advantage of the moment but the way they did it launched lots
3:54 pm
of concern that it looked like they were simply working for the obama white house and that is why people were like especially right wing people were seaing what is going on here. why is the post making this decision? i think that people rightly want to know about the character of candidates and know about biography. people look for reality. and this one feeds the idea of mitt romney as the prep school guy, the rich guy, the out of touch guy. the guy with the dog on the car. one of the big differences in the campaign between obama and romney is personal favorability and obama is way ahead on that. this doesn't help mitt romney with that problem. >> shannon: long-term the impact for romney. >> i was going to say two things. if you are the reporter tasked with interviewing mitt romney's high school classmates and trying to find a portrayial of him and five of them tell you there was this one incident that still -- >> shannon: four on the record
3:55 pm
and one off the record. >> wasn't one of the four one that was misquoted saying as he long held -- >> i don't believe he was. a lot of people on the record that brought this incident up then you are going to use it. >> front page at that length? >> i think as the reporter if your job is to it interview a bunch of high school classmates and they all bring this incident up. of course, you going to report ton. it is not like something that is just insignificant. the larger problem for romney and we talked about this a lot is the entire issue of character and likability. gallup this week, likability, obama 60 and romney 31. he has to improve that number and stories like this and his handling of it didn't help. >> a mild warning for him to not run only on biography. he needs to run on aagain da and ideas and themes is that are larger than romney. the administration and press will try to take h him down as a businessman and a person and if he doesn't stand for
3:56 pm
something larger that will hurt h him. >> shannon: a few seconds left here. think we will see similar things from the president? >> are you kidding? from the washington post? i don't think we need it. he has been president and that is what he is running on and what we should be judging him on. >> shannon: check out panel plus where we pick up on the discussion on our website and we will post that video before noon eastern time. follow us on twitter @ fox newssunday. also check this out at fox newssunday .com. alex trebek giving chris a behind the scenes tour on jeopardy ahead of chris' appearance on the show. don't miss that. we'll be right back. ♪ [ sighs ] [ bird chirps ] [ bird squawks ] ♪ [ bird screeching ] ♪
3:57 pm
[ elevator bell dings ] [ sighs ] how mad is she? she kicked me out. but took the best stuff. i'll get the wrench. ♪ [ male announcer ] kohler's tresham collection. life. with a twist. ♪ ♪ why do you whisper, green grass? ♪ [ all ] shh! ♪ why tell the trees what ain't so? ♪ [ male announcer ] dow solutions use vibration reduction technology to help reduce track noise so trains move quieter througurban areas all over the world. together, the elements of science and the human element can solve anything. [ all ] shh! [ male announcer ] solutionism. the new optimism.
3:58 pm
3:59 pm
finally we heard when biden blurted out ahead of the president but thanks to saturday night live we can see what really happened. >> thanks to "saturday night live," week see. >> are you serious? do you really not get it ? >> the whole gay marriage thing. >> it's not fair, okay? i was the first one to it to be legal. but you are get that's not credit. >> that is not true. >> so why are you all dressed out. >> i'm going to a gala for lady gaga and elton john. >> thank you, chris will be here next week, for all t m